How many times have I written about the ongoing visual tragedy of Marlon Brando‘s One-Eyed Jacks? For too many years the 8-perf VistaVision splendor of this classic 1961 western, shot by Charles Lang, has been unviewable due to the film rights having lapsed into public domain, which has resulted in several atrocious-looking DVD dupes (largely sourced from a decent-looking Paramount laser disc issued in the ’90s) flooding the market. Well, this nightmare is finally at an end with Universal and Martin Scorsese‘s The Film Foundation having recently agreed to join forces on a 4K “restoration” of One Eyed Jacks.

A Universal Q2 report divulged the basics earlier this month, and this morning Film Foundation managing director Jennifer Ahn confirmed that the One-Eyed Jacks project is a definite go.

Yes, Universal and not Paramount, the original distributor. I’ve assumed all along that Paramount had retained rights but apparently not. The rights issue turned out to be “much more complicated than it seems,” Ahn says, “but ultimately we figured out that they belonged to Universal.” The Q2 report divulged that Universal and the Film Foundation have “begun film element research and scan tests” with an assessment report to follow, and then it’ll be off to the races. If all goes well (and it should) the One-Eyed Jacks Bluray will probably be released sometime next year.

My understanding is that the original negative (pic was shot on Eastman 5248) has been sitting in a professionally-maintained Paramount vault ever since, and so a “restoration” is probably not going to be necessary. The work will mainly involve fine-tuning — digital cleanup, a telecine transfer, stabilization, color correction, etc.

Before the work commences I want one thing clearly understood. The aspect ratio of the One-Eyed Jacks Bluray has to be 1.66:1 and not 1.85:1. Please, no monkeying around on this point. 8-perf VistaVision, which was more or less Paramount’s “house” process during the burgeoning widescreen days of the mid 1950s, delivered an in-camera aspect ratio of 1.5 but was mastered in 1.66:1 from the mid to late ’50s. One-Eyed Jacks was actually the last VistaVision film ever shot. If there’s too much pushback against 1.66, at least crop the film at 1.78. No 1.85!

There’s only one robot in Metropolis – Maria. And, I read that she preferred to see movies in their original theatrical ratio as well!

brenkilco

Vistavision was sort of ingenious. How do you get 70mm quality with 35mm film? Just run the film through the camera horizontally and you can make the frames as wide as you like. The AR question is a minefield. And technically Jeff is right. But Vistavision was designed weirdly to be shown at multiple ARs. Which is the right one for any particular film? Dunno. But all the Paramount Hitchcock Blu’s are 1:85 and they look just fine.

Repeating: 8-perf VistaVision, which was more or less Paramount’s “house” process during the burgeoning widescreen days of the mid 1950s, delivered an in-camera aspect ratio of 1.5 but was mastered in 1.66:1 from the mid to late ’50s. It could have been shown cropped at 1.85:1 but 1.66 is right in the middle. What kind of demented personality decides to crop visual information off the top and bottom of the frame when it’s not harming anyone? The Paramount laser disc Jacks was cropped at 1.66. If Universal decides to go with 1.85 there will be trouble, I’m telling you.

TheRealBadHatHarry

“What kind of demented personality decides to crop visual information off the top and bottom of the frame when it’s not harming anyone?”

No one, except those visual artists who compose shots based on some bizarre set of aesthetic principles, regardless of the native proportions of the negative. Those idiots.

Bruce Kimmel

I know it will not make you happy – but here is a nice, big trade ad which states rather plainly Paramount’s preferred ratio for VistaVision. Oops. As I said elsewhere, I suspect they will settle at 1.78. BTW, if you actually HAD the laserdisc of One-Eyed Jacks you’d know it was 1.85.

Deliox

The print I tried to watch was so bad I just turned it off after 3 minutes.

graig

I’ve never seen this, always wanted to. Keep hoping it shows up at the New Bev. (Doesn’t Quentin own a print?) I remember reading Frederic Raphael’s book about working with Kubrick on EYES WIDE SHUT and he relays a story about working with Brando when Kubrick was supposed to direct ONE EYED JACKS. Frederic said Stanley said Marlon was a total nightmare during pre-production, like he brought a stop watch to meetings and would only let people talk for five minutes at a time, something like that.

Terry McCarty

Sam Peckinpah was also involved for awhile as screenwriter before being let go. Peckinpah was reported as saying “Marlon taught me how to hate.”

Kano’s_Razor

Pretty good picture — not your standard-issue Western of the time by any means (I can definitely see why Kubrick, and Brando for that matter, were intrigued).

Nice to see the film elements, and — more importantly — the copyright issues, are being cleaned up (no comment on the aspect ratio trolling).

JoeS

A Personal Message from Adolph Zukor

It has always been our policy that pictures should be capable of being played in any theater in the world. Therefore, we recommend standard sprocket-hole film and standard position, single, optical sound track. To improve the exhibition of pictures, we do feel that screens should be as high and as wide as the theater can install.

A year ago last May we released SHANE as the first of the widescreen pictures from Paramount and have since perfected the VistaVision process to still further improve the definition and quality of picture. The first of the VistaVision pictures to go into release will be WHITE CHRISTMAS, to be released in October. Perspecta sound has
been added to VistaVision prints and may be used, if desired, by any
theater which has the proper equipment.

With regard to the shape of pictures on the screen, we are convinced that the most artistic shape is in a ratio of approximately 1.85:1, and we also find that this shape best fits the great majority of theatres. In the future we are confident that the best in the presentation of motion pictures will be obtained with VistaVision prints shown on a high, wide, seamless screen of this shape, and using excellent projection equipment.

Only the man often credited with producing the first feature length film in America. Founding what became Paramount pictures and becoming it’s long-running chairman of the board.
Oh, and as that head, got all the creative and technical information about studio productions including VISTA-VISION.

VistaVision: “For theatres that had put in big screens for CinemaScope, Paramount felt that the Technicolor print could hold up to being cropped to an aspect ratio of 2:1, though it was not a recommendation. It was good old 1.85:1, the same shape that the other studios were quickly adopting for their cropped wide screen films that Paramount recommended for VistaVision. And compared to your run of the mill cropped wide screen image, VistaVision just blew them away. In Europe, where 1.66:1 was a much more commonly used ratio for cropped wide screen, VistaVision was still recommended to be shown at 1.85:1”

peachtreegal

2:1 according to Box Office magazine.

Bruce Kimmel

Sorry dear boy, but no theaters in the US could show 1.66 by the time of One-Eyed Jacks release – every film was shown in 1.85 by that time, that or scope or large format if that’s how they were shot. When VistaVision was introduced the dictum was it could be shown 1.66, 1.85 or 2.1 but, as has already been proven to you, the recommended ratio was 1.85. That was back in the early days. By the time of One-Eyed Jacks the other two ratios had pretty much gone the way of the dodo bird with rare exceptions and actually there may not BE exceptions by then. I do love that you think you know all about film stock because you’ve read Robert A. Harris – that part is amusing. If you’ve ever actually seen a VistaVision film you’ll have noticed that at the head of every reel for a brief moment there are some lines on the side of the image – those were there and they represent 1.66, 1.85 and 2.1 matting lines for the projectionist. I suspect there will be a slight compromise by Universal and that it will be done 1.78. And that will be fine.